Cited by

Opinions in Louisiana that cite State v. Glaze, 439 So. 2d 605.

16 citing documents.

State v. Lewis 724 So. 2d 830 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1998
The trial court does not abuse its discretion in denying the defendant’s challenge for cause when the juror originally expressed some reservations about his ability to fairly consider the defendant’s right not to testify but later stated that he could disregard his doubts and “base his verdict solely on the evidence and law.” (La.App.
State v. McGuire 577 So. 2d 1120 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1991
3d Cir.1985) (the defendant's inculpatory statement to a witness made on the day after the armed robbery was not admissible as res gestae because it was not spontaneous and was more like a narrative of the events); (La.App.
State v. Kimble 546 So. 2d 834 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1989
State v. Collins 546 So. 2d 1246 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1989
1st Cir.1988), writ denied, (La.App.
State v. Washington 540 So. 2d 502 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1989
State v. Washington 540 So. 2d 502 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1989
State v. Robertson 518 So. 2d 579 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1987
State v. Feet 481 So. 2d 667 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1985
State v. Brown 479 So. 2d 464 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1985
State v. Day 468 So. 2d 1336 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1985
State v. Valentine 464 So. 2d 1091 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1985
State v. Edwards 459 So. 2d 1291 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1984
State v. Williams 458 So. 2d 1315 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1984
State v. Odds 448 So. 2d 868 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1984
State v. Stevenson 447 So. 2d 1125 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1984
State v. Ohrberg 448 So. 2d 1316 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1984